in the south is with a useful meeting with a candid exchange of opinion to add a critical moment. that's how the russian and u. s. foreign policy chiefs describe their talk in geneva, which come amid rising tensions over ukraine, nato expansion. we recently notified congress of our intent to deliver and 17 helicopters. the white house announces it's sending military helicopters to ukraine just hours after the escalation talks with russia. other nato members are also renting up weapon supplies to use both. it's enough to scroll through a couple of random pages to be sure none of the provisions stand up to any critical

analysis. in many cases, it is simply a lie. and the at the news conference after the talks are gay lab ra lashes out at u. s. officials and mainstream media pushing fresh unproven claims against moscow. those are headlines this hour that does it for me, my colleague nick here and i'll be here in just under an hour's time with the phone for us. what you see with us are children with hello and welcome to cross talk. we're all things considered. i'm peter lavelle. i'm this addition to the program. we discuss the ongoing nato, russia pensions. we ask, what is the nato strategy also, what is russia strategy dealing with nato, a sport expansion? and what are the likely comes for both

ah, cross sucking nato russia attentions. i'm joined by my guest. charles shook bridge in london. he's a security analyst and former u. k. army and counterterrorism intelligence officer in washington. and we have michael ma loop. he is a former pentagon senior security policy analyst. and here in moscow we have alexi . now, he is an expert at the russian council on international affairs, as well as chief editor at r t dot com. all right, gentlemen, cross our rules and effect. that means you can jump in anytime you want. and i always appreciate it. let's go to charles 1st in london, and i'm really sick and tired of all the misinformation and propaganda that is being spewed about these growing tensions. there are tensions, there's no doubt about that. ok, but how they're being characterized is really important for us on this program. to set straight. so charles, i asked 3 questions in my introduction. what, what, what is, what is nato up to? what is the gambit here is that they have to continue expanding to be relevant.

what is it american hegemony? because it's picking a needless fight with russia. go ahead. charles, why would you have this guy perennial? is she really of a future? of course, ever since the cold war it's been costing around for road. it has to remind relevance and i full of course, in the background of all our considerations, it always has to be bony mind that there is a massive incentive motivating factor for nato and those that speak for it. remember, there are many in the media that speak for nato, whether declared or undeclared, through the vested interest through funding of, i think tanks and so on from nato. and from the, the what might be quality, a mobility, the military industrial complex, in terms of ramping up tension. so instead of is constantly needful, ever more weapons purchases. this is another story of course, and we,

we know that very well. and there's a company that's always going to be the backdrop to these kind of discussions and these kind of situations there is tension, but there's been tension study since 2014, when of course, the government, if you claim which are the right. and of course, sam democratically elected government, we should say, of course i was led to detention the situation that we're currently in. i think that you have had any to the way that the media is reporting at sent in the last. and that's absolutely wrong. but let's not forget that again, really, it's not just on a daily basis now that we're telecon innovation is going to take place in the us, of course, out from russia to ukraine. that's been happening now for the last 2 to 3 months. but really on, on a daily basis. but if we think about a week, you must be basis. we've really been told by the same newspapers and television outlets in the west that russia is going to invade almost on a retail much basis. and of course, none of that has come to pass, but what i would out on that respect is in that respect, is that,

that doesn't necessarily and not play well for the russian hand as well. because off to russia to west are involved in a negotiation at the end of the day, much of that is behind the scene, but much of a tight out on the airwaves. and cleanings cost is far honest. and certainly those in the west and that agenda are ramping up. the tension may actually work in rushes . frazier at the moment. in other words, you've got a situation where the west media are actually probably over 70. that's actually how congress, she's course because our strengths in the hand of moscow, into negotiations, in the sense that they are heightening detention and making the fear of a possible candidate seem ever more real. and of course, not any russia, but also at the end of the day, the west including, i think most of the people can see push for attention. most of those people are not seeking. of course, a general rule. you know, michael, it, it seems to me, you know, this is a game of brinkman's ship in a way, and i'm really glad that charles stressed the media element of it because the media

is egging it on. ok, and, and they want to see who's going to blink 1st. i mean it's, it's, it's, you know, these are issues of war and peace and, and not just a political game of scoring points here. but we, this is where we are here. i mean, the way i look at it is a nato, and it's, it's genetic code. if it doesn't expand, it disappears because it ends up being a paper. tiger. i mean, if you look at it militarily, it's an empty tusk. i mean, it really doesn't have any it real capacity and whatever american capacity there is in europe. well, it's quite limited to and it's not for a mission like this here. so, i mean, i hope charles is right, that there are a lot more negotiations going on. but michael, i have to stress to our viewers. this has been going on for 30 years, and the russians have dell, a graph very, very clearly. that what they're going to do and what they will tolerate and what they won't tolerate. i mean, i don't understand blanket or maybe we should have another chit chat or, you know,

stilton burke, you know, and on his endless, i'm babbling going on. this is real. this is real and it's really meeting us rate right here in the present. and i just don't think the west takes it very seriously . i hope i'm wrong, michael. go ahead. yeah, i think i think you're absolutely correct peter. this, this is mind boggling. nato is once again looking for its new mission since the end of the cold war. and it's basically a di and dinosaur. and what they're trying to do is resuscitate this, this, this enigma as much as possible in a way that it's bringing on brinkman's ship. and mr. has made it very clear what the red line is. and it is. you got, you got the west coming halfway around the world up to the russian federation. whereas this, mr. newton put it, there is nowhere else for the russians to go and they are on their own soil. and i,

even though the west is agitated and you've got to consider the, the media itself, it is a, it is a tool of, of the, by the ministration and the, and the west to, to push its narrative of, of the evil empire of russia. and, and to stoke that in order to continue its larger plan of, of containment, of russia and, and also to basically get more dollars for, for defense spending. i would, this is how they justify their existence. but it, but the, it's very clear to me that the nato is, has gone, is pushing it up to the brink. there are, there are ways that they can settle this down a little bit. but i think mr. newton has made it very clear. and the media somehow

just doesn't believe and unless there is a problem, my concern is that because it this encouragement by the west, you're going to see elements with in ukraine, historically neo nazi group. so such as the as off battalion pushing this and actually creating their own black fat flag operation in order to bring in order to instigate an attack that will then prompt a response. and then we're, we're in touch once you start this thing, it's very, very difficult to stop a war, a stop, a conflict because it can spread very quickly. and i, and i'm very concerned that ah, elements such as we see it inside of ukraine are really agitated. to do this, and it could just drag us into a conflict, but neither side reminded us of the griffin element of this and weapons and all of that, alex a, let me re go to you. i mean that the general secretary,

so morgan nato, he said the following, eyes on their side, reaffirm nato's open door policy and the right for each nation to choose its own security arrangements except for russia apparently, i mean, this is, is patently absurd. it is hypocrisy that stinks to high heaven. everybody can do it except for russia. i mean, it is, there is no self reflection here, or is this dis, the institution just fighting to continue to exist and waste billions and billions of dollars a year on generating a threat. that is it really there? well, it is. now your are up to the border, you know, somebody's gotta do something. the status quo will not stand alexei well, i think, yeah, i think you're right in the, in the way that really surprised me when secretary of lincoln said that like every, every country has the freedom to its own alliances. but when russia expressed an idea of maybe try trying to deploy military assets to cube or venezuela,

he reacted by saying that the u. s. will react decisively react swiftly or something along those lines. so what i think it's happening is the native is trying to justify its own existence because nato, as we know, it was created for 3 purposes. depending western europe against soviet aggression. there is no soviet union, the more it was created to bring together rival powers of france, germany, the u. k. they're not big rivals anymore. and it was created to keep americans inside the european politics which did not happen after the world war one. so all of these aimed, all these goals are actually obsolete. europe was trying to get the foothold in europe, trying to decide its own face, trying to basically have a role in the international politics and, and they don't, is it just is it is, it basically is not helping right now. it's not helping anyone. it's dragging the us and europe into another war. it's trying to deny russia film right for

her don't security. and it's basically not helping anyone at this point. i think what we see as historic, historic moment, where we can have the sol russia as you have correctly said, russia have been saying the same thing, everything the same thing for 20 or 30 years, but now it's the 1st time the west actually listed as the russia and what it took as a massing hundreds of thousands of russian troops on the russian border. so, you know, it's, it's not a sign of, of an ally and that is helpful. and that is to lesson, it is a sign of alliance that is in decline, as in the constant search for its own. no reason of existence. i will get rep fastly coming on the break. charles, is it possible to have pan european security without russia? because that's exactly what name goes, trying to do. charles?

yes, she writes, of course is the fact that needs to be taken into consideration. i mean, it's the major security factor external factor, according to ne, take part of the say, i disagree and also having to walk on the other speakers have said i'd have to another reason porsha in h i t be constantly costing around for this new role in uniform mission is the internal fractures within itself. that says, trend it's future perhaps something that we can come through more. ok gentlemen, i'm going to jump in here. we're going to go to a short break, and after that short break, we'll continue our discussion on nato rush. attention, stay with our tea. ah, ah ah.

ah . oh, is your media a reflection of reality? ah, in the world transformed what will make you feel safe? isolation, whole community, are you going the right way? where are you being led somewhere? direct. what is true? what is faith?

in the world corrupted, you need to descend. ah. so join us in the depths or remain in the shallows. ah, ah, welcome back to cross stock where all things are considered. i'm funeral about remind you. we're discussing nato rush attentions. ah. okay, let's go back to michael in washington. you know, michael, in my introduction and as i left the 1st block and came into the 2nd block here, i never mentioned ukraine because it's not about ukraine. okay. this is the thing that really irritates me about western policy makers. the think tanks and media and all this, this is about european security structures, okay?

and this is what the russians, when they sent 2 documents, one to nato, one to the united states, not to the e. you okay, to do to decision makers. ultimately, the decision maker is in washington, and it's about how to create a security structure in which all states are given security. this is something that nato does not confidence. they, they say that, that, uh huh. no one came to have a veto over magneto membership. well, that doesn't make any sense at all. russia isn't in the nato club, so why should it obey its rules? okay, is, is absolutely nonsensical. and there's nothing historically relevant to that statement that no one can have a veto. now it does how ins, threatening your security, you're going to be to all you want plus more. go ahead, michael. yeah, i think your, your analysis is correct. it's, it's, it's, this is something much larger than just ukraine, right? this is the, the di and spirit of the u. s. leadership,

a u. s. role as the leader of a world order that is seeing its own demise. and nato is just 11 aspect of this. and what, what this, with this threat of the, of decoupling russia from swift and from the western financial system that, that is, that is, has actually given the impetus for the who are russia and china and others to consider multi polar world order in which they develop their own independent financial system and that seems to be rolling right along as well as creating through the built road initiative, a whole economic environment separate from the west. and you're seeing that, given the fracture within the u, within nato, that they're seeing that the us leadership role generally has diminished and they are shifting more that way. that's why you're not seeing the unified position right

now within nato, toward this ukraine incident and toward russia. as a whole because of that dependency and inter interrelationship that exists and they are and you're not going to and i think that this is something that moscow can play off on in going to individual members. i mean, who is going to be afraid of a date, danish warship, nobody and, and it's, it's in the, in the broad scheme of things. but it's, this is a much larger thing of neo conservatives within the, by the administration. trying to push this narrative again of containment of russia and to and to try to keep alive it's allusion that it is the leader of the so called free world, whatever that means. and this is now coming to a head when you're coming up with an actual threat. and i think at the end of the

proverbial day unless someone starts something independently, as i pointed out a little earlier, i think you're going to see a back in off a little bit of us just us insistence. we saw this just yesterday and biden's news conference when you said, well, if there's just an incursion, it's not as bad as an invasion. and you have the white house quickly having to correct him correcting the president united states. i mean, it's like what, what the president meant to say was and it has sent them, it has sent some, some serious reverberations here in this country. frankly, it's like general milly calling his chinese counterpart saying they were all stable . everything's okay here. i mean, the state craft of the elite in the us and nato is just unbelievable. i'd like to point out also michael mc chrome. he frances taking over the rotating presidency of the you. he's going to him overtures the german chancellor. and also we are doing

this and then, you know, you're not on the same page, get back in the line, get back to the, the fraction you're talking about is very, we'll allow alexi. let me get, let me ask you, i mean, you know, we have stuff that nato is just a defensive alliance. i mean, you know, you hit f one and that's what he says. it's speed dial for this guy here. ok? but i mean, if you have a huge military alliance led by the united states, you're sitting right on your border. it may deploy advance missile systems. how, why, how in the world can you define that as a defensive alliance? go ahead to like say, well, especially when you consider that nato acted as an offensive alliance and li, be active and offensive alliance, and syria is active an offensive alliance when he's been creeping towards rushing waters for, for the last 30 years. this is the, the, what else you know, the problem with inside the minds of mr. sullivan burgundy, site nato. i made a functionaries that they actually do not understand what nato is. sport they'd

understand with nato is all about and they can never grasp what nato is. when it's you, through, through the fruits in russia, west of the russian ice russian perspective. and that is the problem that they're stuck in this cold war mentality, the mentality, they stock, their 2nd this in this mentality that is dictated by its own charter that as well. it says here in the document that it is a defensive alliance. how can it be offensive alive? and yet that is, that is the problem that we have. and that is a problem. i hope that can be solved by us, actually way off by russia, actually talking to me, you know, and making this point across, you know, guys, ok, you are defensive, but take a look through this russian lance. maybe it's not as simple as you may made. sounds so i think, yeah, it's, i mean, even if you talk, i don't want to you, alexei, all chance. yeah. like say no. no, but the europe you're absolutely right. and we can tear a page from the cold war. because during the cold war,

both sides looked at it to the lens of the other and i got, i see your point. ok. i thought we got arms control agreements. okay. with communism is coming to an end. it's an, it may be an ideological conflict, but it's only coming from one side. michael in watching you want to jump in here. we don't have you had i that was respect michael, you want to jump in washington? yeah, i was just going to say that it is, it is, natal describes herself as a defensive alliance, but it has nuclear weapons on european soil and, and in turkey i how, how defensive is that? every 100 of us that's, that's often so that is offensive. and with these missiles and mr. brewton has every right to be concerned with their advancement of these missiles, a defensive missile can easily be made into an off of missiles. i don't know what they're talking about. well, it's michael leslie. oh, good. they did. what look good nato did embrace the legal breakup of yugoslavia, the destruction of libya, and it's a defensive alliance. okay, this is nonsense,

charles. let me go to you. there's a way out here and i think there's the, that the problem is, is that nato, it doesn't want to see a win win one has to win and must one. the other one must lose. that's their approach to this. ok. but charles, we have the example um, austrian neutrality. we had the example of finland ization of finland. i mean, these are not new ideas. charles and everybody could win. why don't not? they can't, can't they even conceive of this? because he's at a called appeasement. it's munich all over again. why are they stuck in this mind? said, go ahead charles on it on. i alluded to this. hopefully, the fact that behind the scenes negotiation to taking place that a lot of this is in public, which as we've discussed, is one of the main problems here because it encourages brinkman's ship and also means that people attend to repeat themselves and see a cone is that funded and funded difficult to extricate themselves from this and this is particularly so on the west side, when we say largely because as we've discussed, the road of the mainstream media and in exacerbating those tensions. but really,

i think the problem comes where people then put forward positions publicly, that then become red lines that can't be negotiated away. because often women in negotiation, people are always going to put forward, presumably more than they might expect to get. for example, in the case of ukraine, where you absolutely right, that is about fall more than you kind of dog will like to emphasize at mike was any point that the fact that there is these whites pretensions anyway, and he's institutional issues between nature. and what, within nature itself and nato's relations with the outside world that mean those tensions can easily be exploited for, for the benefit of sectional groups. and some of those are cuz we did you kind of south, we've seen that, and that's absolutely been the case started last 23 months. and i'll keep li either the last 8 years that the attention to exploited for a very local, a benefits. and of course,

and about some cultures tensions to exist. but we might find it, for example, in the case of ukraine, that some compromise might be possible. because that is a common flash point and hopefully it stays a passive flash point. for example, russia has, that's how it's read lines that should be, i know it's a membership that there should be no troops deployed notes on that. that should be great limits and exercises within former warsaw pact. countries that already within dietary, i suspect seminars. red lines will be, would turn out to be flexible. some of them, as indeed will be, some of the demons, not necessarily nature, because nights are, as you say, always pushes for a 0 sum game, whereas you've got biden, i think it's a bit more shrewd often and he's not. but i think in this case he is, i think he understands. and as indeed he recently met slip when he talked about that, if there was an incursion, presumably into your crime, and a response might not be as bad as if there was a for an invasion. so he's already made that distinction and he so, so of course,

inadvertently, or perhaps deliberately reveal with those divisions that exist between the western and ours and particular perhaps between himself and what nato itself would actually want. and so consequently that there is, i think, room for compromise and at some points that will hopefully be cheap. but we need to be aware that there are those vested interests always behind the scenes. and absolutely, i would agree that within you kind especially there are interests who do not want whatsoever i got compromised to be reached at the lawson they want is a movement of that to a flash point that currently exists in eastern parts of you crime, michael about we have 50 seconds left here, isn't it? that kind of ironic to you that the more the west helps their ukranian friends, the smaller ukraine gets, you have the illegal qu than they lose crimea. then they attack the don bass to don bass leaves. i mean, how much smaller is ukraine going to get because of friendship with nato? got 40 seconds, my wife said, yeah, i think i think people are beginning to realize going to war over ukraine. what is

in our national interest? what is that we just pull? we've been engaged in war since 2001. and what, what does ukraine offer us in terms of national security? it's more of a european issue, but europeans are creating their own problem unless they, they do as your other folks have said. begin to understand and realize that there can be flexibility built in give especially when you come right up to the brink. i think at the and the proverbial day. unless someone instigates something from within ukraine that you will see more flexibility. and if not, then i think you're going to see russia doing much more proactive make little general. that'd be great. i will read that. maybe we'll re be convening next week to see how this is moving on here with that's all the time we have gentlemen. many thanks them i guess in london, washington, and here in moscow when,

thanks to where it be worth for watching us here at ortiz, see you next time. remember crosstalk with ah, so called enhanced interrogation techniques used by the u. s. officials were basically designed as techniques to break down the human mind. if you force a human being to stay in a certain position doesn't take very long to the pain involved, to become absolutely excruciating, but nobody's lean finger on you. you are doing it to yourself and we started adopting those techniques when i was station and mosul among them were stress positions, sleep deprivation. and using type of therm. yeah. there's already beginning to be

evidence that these old techniques are now being used on immigrants and children, whatever you do in war comes home. nobody has been held accountable for the torture that happened in the past. the moral authority, the made america will later sacrifice the shimmer of effective interrogation. long when i was sure seemed wrong. i just don't know. i mean you, whoa, yes, to shape out disdain becomes the advocate and engagement equals the trail. when so many find themselves worlds apart, we choose to look for common ground

with bash kaiser. this is the kaiser report. we're in l. zante el salvador. lapping up the luxury of the y o. val the door when it's mountains and waves and bitcoin adoption, things are happening here. there's mountains, by the way. our volcanoes don't just that one who wants to be careful? one should also be careful of the hot lava of inflation flowing everywhere. the interesting thing to observe from our per chair in paradise, at the best surfing beach in the world, l z on say big beach is that inflation is, are opting everywhere. and when it is impossible to contain, remember back in 2008.